On this anniversary, I'm fighting to protect against the Trump Administration's attacks on health care, especially their efforts to slash Medicaid coverage for hundreds of thousands of Coloradans through Republicans' One Big Beautiful Bill Act.
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|Colorado
Michael F. Bennet
SoupScoreanalysis-first civic rating · view full breakdown
Loading…
Voting Record — 885
Yes27%
No64%
Present0%
Not Voting9%
Party align96%
Cross-party3%
SoupScore
District Map
Senate District (Statewide)
U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Social & Web
External Resources
Michael F. Bennet
U.S. SenatorDemocratColorado
SoupScore
Michael F.'s ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 77 sponsored · 268 cosponsored
Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.
Today is the 61st anniversary of President Johnson signing Medicare and Medicaid into law. Decades later, these two vital programs remain a lifeline for 2.3 million Coloradans.
The Trump Administration’s latest asylum rule undermines due process and turns its back on people fleeing persecution.
America is strongest when we uphold our laws and values. We cannot deny vulnerable people a fair chance to seek protection guaranteed under U.S. law.
thehill.com/policy/natio...
We must do everything we can to back Ukraine’s fight, including by passing this bill and my legislation to ensure continued intelligence-sharing and strengthen drone cooperation.
Good to see President Zelenskyy again yesterday.
As Putin stalls at the negotiating table and keeps striking Ukraine, I’m pleased the Senate advanced our bipartisan Russia sanctions bill 86-12.
Read my full statement on tonight's Senate vote ⬇️
Our bipartisan sanctions bill will impose greater pressure on Putin to end his unprovoked war, especially as Ukraine seizes the momentum and increasingly takes the fight to Moscow.
I am pleased to see the Senate take the first step today to get this done.
Read my full statement on the push from Trump allies to gut protections for historic sites ⬇️
Last week, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation voted to radically alter the National Historic Preservation Act, undermining Tribal sovereignty and the federal government's trust responsibility to Tribal Nations.
Coloradans see right through this latest attempt to undermine our gold-standard election system before the midterms, and I’ll continue to fight this every step of the way.
President Trump can't even convince members of his own party to pass the SAVE Act, so he’s looking for new ways to attack mail-in ballots and make it harder for Americans to vote.
Colorado has lost another firefighter. Five lives have now been taken by this relentless fire season. Our hearts are with every family, every crew, and every community carrying this unimaginable loss. We will never take their service and sacrifice for granted.
That's exactly why we have to keep fighting. Science and innovation funding should never depend on which party is in power. I'll keep standing up for Colorado to protect the funding our researchers and communities have earned.
This confirms what we've known all along: the Trump Administration is using federal funding to punish states that dont fall in line politically.
A private company wants to nearly triple the size of its gravel quarry outside Glenwood, putting our hot springs at risk.
We're glad to work with the Glenwood Springs community to introduce legislation that would block this expansion.
www.westword.com/news/sen-ben...
I demand that ACHP work with Tribes to preserve and improve the consultation process, not disregard the federal government's critical responsibilities to Tribal Nations.
No longer requiring the federal government to meaningfully engage in Tribal consultation before projects go forward will not only irreversibly impact our history – it puts Tribal sovereignty, and Tribes’ ability to engage in government-to-government consultation, at risk.
I am outraged to see the new regulations proposed by the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) that threaten to eliminate Tribal consultation as we know it.
My bill with @bluntrochester.senate.gov would invest in workforce training programs that drive economic mobility, so veterans, single parents, and workers of every background can compete in today's economy.
Too many Coloradans want to build a sustainable career to provide for their families, but haven't been given the tools to earn a living wage.
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History885 total votesExpandCollapse
Voting History
885 total votes
Recent roll calls with party-majority context so it is easier to scan how this member tends to vote.
| Date | Bill | Question | Position | Party Maj | Align? | Result |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-02-05 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (55-44) |
| 2025-02-04 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (55-45) |
| 2025-02-04 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (54-46) |
| 2025-02-04 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Nomination Confirmed (77-23) |
| 2025-02-03 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-46) |
| 2025-02-03 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Nomination Confirmed (59-38) |
| 2025-02-03 | — | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2025-01-30 | — | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (83-13) |
| 2025-01-30 | — | End debate | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (62-35) |
| 2025-01-30 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | YES | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (80-17) |
| 2025-01-29 | — | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (78-20) |
| 2025-01-29 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (56-42) |
| 2025-01-29 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (56-42) |
| 2025-01-28 | H.R. 23 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (54-45, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-01-28 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | YES | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (77-22) |
| 2025-01-27 | — | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (97-0) |
| 2025-01-27 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (68-29) |
| 2025-01-25 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (67-23) |
| 2025-01-25 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (59-34) |
| 2025-01-24 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (61-39) |
| 2025-01-24 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (50-50, Vice President of the United States, voted Yea) |
| 2025-01-23 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-49) |
| 2025-01-23 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Nomination Confirmed (74-25) |
| 2025-01-23 | — | End debate | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (72-26) |
| 2025-01-22 | S. 6 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (52-47, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-01-21 | — | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (53-45) |
| 2025-01-21 | — | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (54-46) |
| 2025-01-20 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | YES | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (99-0) |
| 2025-01-20 | S. 5 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Bill Passed (64-35) |
| 2025-01-20 | S. 5 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Amendment Agreed to (75-24) |
| 2025-01-17 | S. 5 (119th) | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (61-35, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-01-15 | S. 5 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (46-49) |
| 2025-01-15 | S. 5 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Amendment Agreed to (70-25) |
| 2025-01-13 | S. 5 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (82-10) |
| 2025-01-09 | S. 5 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Agreed to (84-9, 3/5 majority required) |
Alignment stats consider only votes where a clear yes/no majority existed for the legislator's party. Cross-party marks divergence where the vote matched the opposite party majority. ↔ indicates cross-party divergence.
← PrevPage 18 / 18